The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has recently held that commissions paid to a sports betting agent is not exempt from VAT (order of 14 May 2008, Joined Cases C-231/07 and C-232/07). The Brussels Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel Bruxelles) had asked the ECJ for clarification as to whether an exemption pursuant to Art. 13 part B letter d no. 3 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC should be considered, according to which the supply of certain financial services relating to turnovers resulting from the transfer of bets are exempt from VAT.

Per einstweiliger Verfügung hat das Landgericht Frankfurt/Main mit Beschluss vom 19.06.2008 dem Land Hessen verboten, bei der Bewerbung der Lotterie 6 aus 49 den möglichen Höchstgewinn mittels sog. Aufstellerwerbung im öffentlichen Verkehrsraum zu bewerben. Die Antragstellerin hat dies als zur Lotto-Spielteilnahme anreizende Werbung beanstandet, die wegen der einseitigen Heraustellung eines besonders hohen Gewinns unangemessen und unsachlich ist.

In four judgments rendered in main proceedings, the 1st chamber of the Administrative Court of Freiburg (Verwaltungsgericht Freiburg) just recently declared the state sports betting monopoly to be in breach of Community law and revoked prohibition orders issued by the Regional Council of Karlsruhe (decisions of 16 April 2008, file-no. K 2683/07, 1 K 2063/06, 1 K 2066/06 and 1 K 2052/06). The 3rd chamber of the Administrative Court of Freiburg has now joined this legal opinion in summary proceedings.

Mit Urteil vom 14. Mai 2008 hat das Landgericht München I eine gegen die Bayerische Staatliche Lotterieverwaltung erlassene einstweilige Verfügung bestätigt, mit der eine im Meta-Tag der Internetpräsenz getätigte werbliche Äusserung verboten worden ist. Bei Eingabe des Suchbegriffs 'Lotto' bei google.de erschien im Februar 2008 an siebter Trefferstelle der Text: "Lotto Bayern: Spielen Sie im Internet Lotto, GlücksSpirale und ODDSET."

In addition to the Dutch reference to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands in the case of Ladbrokes (cf. German Gaming Law updated no. 106), the Raad van State, in its capacity as the highest administrative court of the Netherlands, has referred a case to Luxembourg (decision of 14 May 2008, file-no. 200700622/1). This reference has been filed with the ECJ as Case C-203/08. The referral is based on administrative proceedings between the world’s largest betting exchange Betfair (Sporting Exchange Ltd.) and the Dutch Minister of Justice.

Wettbewerbszentrale (Centre for Protection against Unfair Competition) recently won a court suit in the second instance against the Free State of Bavaria who offers sports betting and games of chance commercially via its State Lottery Administration (Staatliche Lotterieverwaltung), which is a member of Deutscher Lotto- und Totoblock, the cartel of the monopoly operators. The Court of Appeal of Munich (Oberlandesgericht München) enjoined the Free State of Bavaria from unfair advertisements with regard to three different circumstances.

The Netherland High Court (Hoge Raad der Nederlanden), the highest Dutch court for civil- and penal cases referred a case regarding the cross-border offer of sports bets for preliminary ruling. The referral is based on proceedings between the private bookmaker Ladbrokes and the Dutch gambling monopoly operator De Lotto. In 2002 Ladbrokes was restricted from accepting sports bets form Dutch citizens. The High Court (Hoge Raad) referred three questions to the ECJ:

The barriers against the cross-border offering of sports betting and gambling erected by the EU (and EEA) Member States have been under strict scrutiny by the European Commission for several years. The Commission judges numerous national provisions to be in breach of Community law and has therefore already initiated infringement proceedings against several Member States, including Germany (two proceedings, one relating to the sports betting monopoly and one relating to the new Interstate Treaty on Gambling) and Austria.

The Administrative Court of Berlin (Verwaltungsgericht Berlin) has once again expressed fundamental constitutional objections against the Interstate Treaty on Gambling (Glücksspiel-Staatsvertrag) and thus granted relief from judicial execution to a sports betting agent (decision of 5 May 2008, case-no. VG 35 A 108.08). The agent, represented by ARENDTS ANWÄLTE (www.gaminglaw.de), may thus continue to transfer sports bets to a private bookmaker, state licensed in Malta, an EU member state.

After the Austrian regional court of Linz's reference for preliminary ruling regarding the monopoly on casinos other proceedings regarding the licensing procedure for casinos have just recently been referred to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for preliminary ruling, this time from Greece (Case C-145/08 -- "Club Hotel Loutraki"). The reference for preliminary ruling by the Symvoulio tis Epikrateias involves the question whether Community procurement law...

After numerous decisions on sports betting the European Court of Justice may now deal with the admissibility of a casino monopoly. The Austrian County Court of Linz (Landesgericht Linz) recently referred several fundamental questions for preliminary ruling to the ECJ (Case no. C-64/08 - Engelmann). The ECJ's decision could well throw into disarray the current licensing system for casinos in Austria and could be of fundamental importance for other Member States as well. The County Court of Linz referred the following questions for preliminary ruling:

After the Gambelli decision at the end of 2003 and its follow-up decision Placanica of March 2007 another landmark decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regarding the freedom to provide services with regard to sports betting will be pronounced at the beginning of next year. On 29 April 2008, the ECJ's Grand Chamber, composed of 13 judges, heard Case No. C-42/07, referred from Portugal last year (cf. German Gaming Law updated no. 79 for the questions referred for preliminary ruling).